ire funding.

Now what do you think we got for those 49 billion? Are you aware of anything that's coming out of college research that's changing anything? Because you know what I worry about is that we got nothing for it, and that it's just a bunch of people who are rushing to publish any kind of science they can, because I don't think we say okay, we'll only give you this money if your research is really good for the economy and good for America. I doubt it. Bet it's a whole bunch of we're going to prove that DEI is the best thing in the world. We're going to prove that there are more than two genders. We're going to prove — I feel like it's going to be a whole bunch of just backward science and random correlations and slap-together research with students collecting data that nobody trusts. And we already know that the peer-review process doesn't work at all, so even being peer-reviewed doesn't really make it true more than half the time anyway.

So wouldn't you love to see some kind of a top 10, here's what we got for our 49 billion? I feel like most of that was wasted, but I wonder if it's 100 percent it was wasted. And I also think to myself, if they were doing research that could be sort of immediately turned into product — let's say they were doing research on a new cancer cure or a new way to make batteries last longer — that is the sort of thing that they might be doing. How much of that wouldn't have been funded by industry? I feel like industry would have funded that, right, because it can't be super expensive to do a study like that. So you don't think Tesla would say, okay, if you're working on a way to make our batteries last twice as long, yeah, we'll shoot you half a million for that. So I'm not sure any of this makes sense, that the federal government should be even in the business of funding research when private industry presumably would want to fund it too. There might be some exceptions, but I'd like to see the argument for why we do this.

According to Slay News, Frank Bergman is writing that the World Economic Forum is asking for a global ban on homegrown food. Now they're talking mostly about urban gardens, where people put a little garden in the middle of a city, and the argument is that these little gardens are so inefficient that they contribute more badness to the environment than they produce in food, and it would be better if everybody just got their food from the big farms instead of trying to grow at home. To which I say, does anybody listen to the World Economic Forum in 2025? I feel like didn't Klaus Schwab already retire? I feel like the World Economic Forum isn't really even a thing that anybody pays attention to, and here would be a very good reason why nobody pays attention. It doesn't feel like a 2025 problem, does it? It feels like a 2020 problem that, oh, that World Economic Forum, they have too much power. Now it just seems like a club for rich people, and they put out some weird proclamations that nobody cares about. I mean, none of it's binding, so anyway.

And I guess they did a study of 73 urban agriculture sites around the world. We don't care.

Grace Price, who you know because she talks about nutrition and food problems in the